Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length

Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Topics - Eric Plumrose

Pages: [1] 2 3 4
Film & TV / BULA QUO!
« on: 29 June, 2013, 08:50:11 AM »
Quite possibly the only definition of ARSOM you'll ever need:

What th -- ?

Help! / Lion Bar advert music
« on: 15 May, 2012, 01:57:32 PM »
I must admit, I'm a little disappointed the instrumentation isn't as dirty as I remember but anyone any idea who did the music at 6:02 (assuming it wasn't commissioned especially)?

Books & Comics / V FOR VENDETTA and the rise of Anonymous
« on: 11 February, 2012, 06:58:50 AM »
No one else seems to have posted this, so . . .

Alan Moore writes for Auntie

Help! / Channel 4 Drama Series
« on: 08 November, 2011, 04:58:29 PM »
. . . A few years back. Similar title (I think) and subject matter (but with a pre-pubescent boy) to WE NEED TO TALK ABOUT KEVIN. I'm not entirely convinced it wasn't JAKE'S PROGRESS but if not, what?

Help! / 'In Orbit Every Monday'
« on: 13 June, 2010, 03:15:29 PM »
Despite thinking as a nipper that Forbidden Planet sold the Prog a week in advance of anywhere else (a rare trip to the Old Smoke on a Friday and seeing Prog 382 tormenting me from a shelf THE DAY BEFORE I COULD BUY MINE AT TOMMY'S being the cause of this bedevilment), I can't remember the reason why 2000 AD had the Monday tagline when it seemed only available on Saturday.

Someone here once explained this great publishing mystery (as Sim-1 put it by way of a non-explanation in his list of facts and factoids about 2000 AD in one of the Annuals). Either from anyone would be much appreciated, chums.

Help! / Cloudbusting
« on: 17 February, 2010, 07:47:08 PM »
Trying to find a (minor, in both senses) comic strip/cartoon character who is always accompanied by a rain/black cloud overhead. Occasional appearances only, possibly in PEANUTS (no, it isn't Pig-Pen who's always in a cloud, and one of dirt and dust at that) or perhaps even THE PERISHERS. Definitely NOT Joe Btfsplk (LI'L ABNER), nor is it Bad-Luck Schleprock from whichever Flintstones' spin-offs he appears in.


« on: 12 February, 2010, 08:24:47 PM »
Saw this yesterday and I'm STILL trying to fathom it. No, not the TV series, but the BIG SCREEN remake; which, if nothing else, was incentive enough for me to hire out first the 1985 original (FINALLY, having never seen it), courtesy of my local library (despite having incurred a fivepoundfine due to their incompetence when it came to renewing some books. Twats).

Mel's on semi-automatic mode, mostly sleepwalking his way through LETHAL WEAPON 1.5 sans the narrative cohesion. Sure, with almost four hours less to play with, a certain amount of paring down both in plot (Gaia) and characterization (incest) is to be expected; yet stuff simply happens often for no reason than to give people something to do. Once the conspiracy is revealed (far too early, which would have been fine if there'd been a twist towards the end), the movie has bugger-all else to do except indulge in Mel's gulping gung-ho antics. I'm still unsure exactly what purpose Jedburgh serves (now THERE is where that twist might have been), even if Ray Winstone's final scene has a quiet coolness about it.

And yet, it's the TV series not the film that's doing an Emma Craven, despite the final episode's drawn-out silliness. So much so, I was even comparing moobs with Ian McNiece, last night.

« on: 01 February, 2010, 08:31:06 PM »
Surprisingly, I didn't have too much of a problem with this once I realized what was going on. Found it to be a mostly entertaining slice of Christian propaganda with a few cool bits thrown in, even if it does bottle the ending. LOVED the soundtrack and look, though. Quite reminiscent of any number of post-apocalypses (apocalypsi?) from the 1980s.
Aside from my being godless wormfood, my main problem however is that it lacks any historical sense of how the Bible came to be. Just before yer man Eli starts regurgitating Genesis, I was hoping he'd be revealed as himself illiterate and start dictating something of his own. A personal embellishment that's in the 'tell', as Savannah Nix would have it.
I've no idea how the supposed rewrites changed the film, but yeah. As summed up by Cosmic Ray (no less), 'Guy delivers Bible to West Coast liberals so they can put it on a shelf'.

Help! / We have known each other for many years . . .
« on: 28 January, 2010, 06:54:19 PM »
. . . And this is just the latest time I've come to you for counsel or for help. Anyway, I'm trying to find the video for a car ad from the late '90s/early Noughties.

Realizing some aging cosca-type has just entered the house, another younger chap makes a hasty exit through the bedroom window of the woman he's been dallying with. The implication is he's been knocking off the older man's missus, but no! The older man is in fact his old man, the woman his own partner, and Dad's just turned up for their weekend fishing trip (or some such, which the young shoal dodger's trying to avoid).

Accompanied by Dean Martin swinging his way through 'Memories Are Made of This'.

« on: 27 January, 2010, 08:57:48 PM »
More EQUILIBRIUM than THE MATRIX (as the blurbitis would have us believe), it squanders a decent cast (employing at least half of Australia's ten actors) and an interesting premise for contrived predictability and obligatory achtung set-pieces. A shame, really, as the minor details in the first fifteen minutes or so (fashions, the pervasive smoking, Ethan's ear) seemed to suggest a bit more thinking than usual had gone into this.

Always nice to see Sam Neill playing a villain, though. And there's a few blue boobies for those of you hankering for a Neytiri fix but can't face another three-hour stint in the cinema.

Film & TV / THE BOX
« on: 13 December, 2009, 01:47:43 PM »
Not as likeable as SOUTHLAND TALES, nor as much a mess. At times the film even feels it was made in the decade in which it's set (the 1970s, in case you're wondering and no bad thing, that).

It's all still a bit muddled, however; due not from Kelly's compulsive musings on free will and fate (the ending's a nice summation of this) but his quirks as a writer/director. Things seem to simply happen for the sake of being weird, often undermining what little menace the film does create. The letter V is throughout a motif serving no real purpose, reaching its nadir during the library scene. And nosebleeds are so 1990s.

Still, I quite enjoyed it; although I've no idea how it compares to Matheson's (Mmm! Matheson's) short story. Also, the ad campaign really does need some Boo Radleys obviousness.

Film & TV / THE DESCENT Part 2
« on: 09 December, 2009, 07:02:34 PM »
What an absolute turd.

Artistically. Commercially. Dramatically. POINTLESS. Yes, I knew going in the basic premise; yet, instead of opting for some sub-ALIENS fun, however, it's to the 2005 original what BENEATH THE PLANET OF THE APES is to its predecessor. BUT WITHOUT THE BOMB-WORSHIPPING MUTANTS.

Nor is there ANY sense of irony that Sarah and Juno both come back from the dead only to die all over again. There's some token gubbins about redemption towards the end but it in no way justifies the film's existence. If Shauna MacDonald really must reprise her role then bloody-well have her join the crawlers.

And the ending makes absolutely NO bastard sense.


Help! / Searching for a half-remembered film
« on: 15 November, 2009, 02:52:20 PM »
Possibly Japanese but definitely of east Asian origin. It has a contemporary setting (the '90s if not the Noughties) and tells the tale of a young woman co-existing as two different versions of herself, one straight-laced, the other more extroverted. Best way I can think to describe it is SLIDING DOORS meets THE MAN WHO HAUNTED HIMSELF.

ANN AND ANNA seems to be the closest I've come to remembering the title but an online search has returned bugger-all.

« on: 12 November, 2009, 06:58:28 PM »
Set in an alternative Britain in which the death penalty has been re-introduced, apparently.

Anyone able to sit through this? Did it transcend the crass wish-fulfilment of the title and the first few minutes?

« on: 26 October, 2009, 09:53:20 PM »
As I said this afternoon to the latest offender (this time during SAW VI), I really can't remember the last time I didn't have to ask someone to shut up (my exact words). He immediately took offence to my phrasing (or rather, he had to show some face in front of his girlfriend but without actually kicking off), although on a technicality it was the young man himself who said I was telling him to 'shut up', I merely agreeing with him.

Now, yes. I should have been more polite about it. I could have been more polite, certainly. Thing is, I've lost all patience for it. Unlikely as it was, I really don't care if this just happened to be that one time he and his girlfriend thought it perfectly okay to have an ongoing conversation for the first fifteen minutes.

Even if (as he protested) they were talking about the film (continuously, of course), there's a far better time to analyze it (this is the latest instalment of the SAW franchise, we're talking about) and it ain't during the film itself.

I've no idea if it's indeed the case but there seems to be this attitude nowadays that the cinema is just another place to hang out. It's disrespectful to ask one person to refrain from talking throughout yet perfectly fine to spoil another's enjoyment of the film; the film itself, I presume, no longer being the reason for going to the cinema in the first place.

Pages: [1] 2 3 4